The BCCI has absolutely nothing in common with the Afrikaaner volk, but what it came up with this afternoon in Mumbai was a classic laager, the traditional defensive encircling of wagons to protect its own. In this case its own property and territory, the property being Indian cricket and the territory all the ground it had lost over the last three years to the IPL and Lalit Modi.

On the surface the BCCI's annual general meeting was meant to be a polite incantation of the names of those who will hold office for a year after another orderly election. Yet every move and announcement that emerged from the AGM carried with it the specific purpose of strengthening the BCCI's internal order and regaining its control after what three very lucrative but extremely tumultuous years - during which the IPL had threatened to change the existing order not only of the BCCI but of cricket itself.

That's why the most significant move is not the coronation of N Srinivasan as president-elect but a change in the BCCI's constitution, undoing what had been done three years ago, when the IPL was placed at the centre of India's cricketing universe.

The IPL governing council will now be called the IPL Governing Council Committee, one of the BCCI's 13 regular sub-committees, and will have a one-year term instead of five, thus allowing all errors and appointments rectified, if necessary, within 12 months.

And in the best traditions of the BCCI, the committee will now comprise only "honorary" officials, seven men instead of 14, each of whom must be a BCCI office-bearer. The BCCI's constitution has now ruled that all decisions taken by the committee must be ratified by the BCCI secretary, not the previously all-powerful "Commissioner", a title invented and clung to by Modi. This, an insider said, was just to ensure that they don't create a monster again.

Modi's lawyer said the decisions had been taken with "prospective" effect, so that his client, or someone like him, could not find their way into the BCCI again. The board has now become a laager that cannot be broken through.

This AGM marked the end of a six-month operation against Modi. His lawyer spelt out the precise steps: first the suspension, followed by the replacement of his vice-presidency, and now the shrinking of the governing council. In this time he went from being one of the most powerful men in world cricket to a cardboard cutout that has now been dismantled by the very men with whom he ascended to authority.

Yet before he is turned into a victim, fall guy or a symbol of new India trumped by old India, a little history. Just as the BCCI has done with its constitution, Modi treated the BCCI's constitution as if it were plasticine, changing the IPL's laws, codes and regulations as the league went careening along in its wildly popular way. Eventually, though, financial irregularity is nothing but illegal number-crunching, and fudging figures is fudging figures, regardless of whether it is done by those in safari suits or linen suits. Modi is now dealing with the consequence of not merely his actions but his ambitions.

Just as the BCCI has done with its constitution, Modi treated the BCCI's constitution as if it were plasticine, changing the IPL's laws, codes and regulations as the league went careening along in its wildly popular way

If the old hands at the BCCI fear anything, it is a "corporate takeover" of the sport. At an informal meeting in Kolkata earlier this year, former BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya spoke at length about the threats to his beloved "Board" as a result of the IPL explosion of corporate control and involvement. Modi didn't just belong to that world, he advertised himself as its middleman; the older order took the first chance to "shut him down", words Modi used about Shashi Tharoor, the man who instead unravelled him.

Following today's AGM, the BCCI will now have control over not only the IPL's finances and its thicket of business deals but also its organisation and conduct. Much like it does over its Corporate Cup. A franchise executive says the IPL of the future will be badly administered "because it's not clear who is the IPL boss". The franchise owners include some of Modi's closest friends and they will now have to search for new point men.

If there was an unexpected development from the fairly predictable meeting, it was the BCCI's backing off from its civil suit against Dalmiya, the man against whom in 2005, ICC president Sharad Pawar, BCCI president Shashank Manohar, Srinivasan and Modi came together with the sole agenda of knocking him out of office. The architect of the Dalmiya decision is said to be BCCI vice-president Arun Jaitley, who is known to have been in regular contact with Dalmiya in recent months. The decision came without seeking Pawar's direct approval; as one senior BCCI office bearer said, "Pawar sahib is in the ICC now, he does not interfere with the BCCI."

The message was clear. As ICC chief, it is what Pawar must be seen to be doing. In his home constituency, it could even mean giving the impression of yielding clout. In any case, Pawar's lieutenants of 2005 are now confident enough to be generals, and Modi, the man whom he supported and expected to be his aide at the ICC, is now out in the wilderness.

The AGM also passed a fairly scathing decision against three of the most influential names in Indian cricket, Sunil Gavaskar, Ravi Shastri and Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi. Co-opted into the original IPL Council at generous salaries, they will be ruled by the remodelled constitution, in which cricketers will participate for little more than the prestige of being on the IPL committee. Much has been made of Gavaskar's "ouster", but as of today he is still head of the technical committee and, like Ravi Shastri, is a part of the BCCI's commentary panel.

The three "young" and expectedly "forward-looking" names who are now in the BCCI mix all happen to be sons of powerful politicians of an older era - Anurag Thakur of Himachal Pradesh whose father was a state chief minister, Ranjib Biswal of Orissa, whose father was a state deputy chief minister, and Jyotiraditya Scindia of Madhya Pradesh, whose father was BCCI president in the early 1990s. While Thakur, once a controversial appointment as chairman of junior selectors, has turned the first-class ground in Dharamsala into the country's most scenic cricket venue, the cricketing plans of both Scindia and Biswal remain unseen. Two of the three are thought of as "protégés" of an influential BCCI politician, and this mentoring will no doubt also be translated into the establishment of a future dynasty of officials, who will protect their turf like Manohar and Srinivasan now do.

The single move for which the BCCI can take a bow is Anil Kumble's appointment as chairman of the National Cricket Academy. The incumbent Shastri's globetrotting as a BCCI-contracted commentator meant he could not be the hands-on man that the NCA needs to turn it from its current status as hospital-cum-injury-rehabilitation unit to a centre of excellence. It makes Kumble the boss of the NCA's director Sandeep Patil, who in 1996 briefly coached an Indian team that included Kumble.

Fourteen years is a long time for tables and seasons to turn; in Indian cricket, things change at a much faster rate. Jagmohan Dalmiya should testify to and Lalit Modi surely endorse that fact.

The IPL was becoming as powerful as the BCCI, because the international players were finding the IPL, more attractive than the cricket played by the nations in international cricket. I wonder why the BCCI gave the idea of the IPL germination. Making money is the top priority of a business institution, but the BCCI does not see itself as a business institution. It sees itself, presumably, as a sports body, more than any other body. Did it begin looking at itself as essential to national interests? What was the reason for hosting the IPL, other than to make cricket more important, than it already is, in India and the world? The BCCI always gives an impression, that the profits accruing to the body is incidental. Perhaps, I am reading too much into the matter. After all, the BCCI decides about the itinerary of the IPL, and the IPL does not decide upon the itinerary of the BCCI. Now, can the BCCI return the investments of the team owners, even if it wanted to? What soup is the BCCI in?

Aditya
on October 5, 2010, 12:11 GMT

Mr Lalit Modi should be fair to himself, and to the others in the BCCI board. Mr Modi made a mistake of judgment. Mr Modi was not the IPL Commissioner, because he was irreplaceable. He was not even the IPL commissioner because of the BCCI. He became what he became in the BCCI, because of circumstances not dictated to by him, or by any other BCCI official. If Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya could become the most important man in world sport, and if his own people, who were his pillars, wanted to replace him, or rather, the pillars of his support changed, and wanted to change him, then who is to blame? The BCCI, as a parent body of the IPL, or Indian Cricket? Perhaps, ultimately, there is nothing permanent to perception. If the BCCI was to become non essential to the running of Indian Cricket, Then the body would become irrelevant.

Rajesh
on October 1, 2010, 19:40 GMT

One thing is certain in India.......... Politics & Cricket will never get divorced, they are married for eternity !!

Rajaram
on October 1, 2010, 17:22 GMT

A masterstroke - Modi crushed out like a cigarette.

Prahlad
on October 1, 2010, 2:51 GMT

Yay for Kumble! Hope he can unearth some good spin bowlers. Someone who is even half as good as he was.

PRAVEEN
on September 30, 2010, 21:09 GMT

@EightBall ...so just because Asif/Butt ..et al were not included in IPL doesnt justify them getting into Spot Fixing. This is the dumbest argument I have heard. Life is unfair...not always the most talented get rewarded. And BCCI/IPL doesnt hold any responsibility towards PCB. Just because PCB doesnt know how to run its proceedings and is not making enough money doesnt mean that India has to do charity and help PCB.

ashish
on September 30, 2010, 16:34 GMT

a kick in the butt to mr gavaskar was long overdue. wish shastri had also asked for the exorbitant sum and would summarily have been kicked. their contribution to cricket post retirement is an enormous zero. sitting in commentary box and taking potshots at rivals and defenseless young cricketers, gesturing in the name of consultancy, siging paens of their owners and promoting jingoism and false national pride are some of their generous contributions. wish we had more cricketers who could speak english to sit in the commentary box. being ex-cricketers conversant in english seemingly is the only criterion for becoming commentator these days, otherwise their commentary is hollow like their personality. its just that they are great cricketers, they can qualify for every job in the world.

Rohith
on September 30, 2010, 15:42 GMT

@EightBall.. BCCI has never had good relations with PCB except for 2003-2008. For those five years, both countries India and Pakistan in general had friendly relations. That friendliness was seen in cricketing relations. After Mumbai-08, all the things became worse, and so did cricketing ties. The relations between BCCI & PCB were always dependent upon the political relations between the countries..

Sanket
on September 30, 2010, 14:40 GMT

The IPL was a part of the BCCI. How can there be a conflict between IPL and BCCI?
I think this is a case of unnecessary sensationalizing.

A conflict between the old guys and the new is possible.

But there were corporate honchos in BCCI before Modi came (Dalmiya, Srinivasan, and Amin are all businessman).

And statistically, the president-elect (N. Srinivasan's) team is the most successful in IPL.

Pradeep
on September 30, 2010, 14:28 GMT

Ridiculous to know that Shastri, Pataudi and Gavaskar were getting 1 crore for their role in being in the IPL council. Who is Lalit Modi to fix such fancy salaries for such jobs which entail a few hours of work every now and then!! Glad Lalit Modi has been crushed by the combined mite of the BBCI office bearers.

Aditya
on October 5, 2010, 12:33 GMT

The IPL was becoming as powerful as the BCCI, because the international players were finding the IPL, more attractive than the cricket played by the nations in international cricket. I wonder why the BCCI gave the idea of the IPL germination. Making money is the top priority of a business institution, but the BCCI does not see itself as a business institution. It sees itself, presumably, as a sports body, more than any other body. Did it begin looking at itself as essential to national interests? What was the reason for hosting the IPL, other than to make cricket more important, than it already is, in India and the world? The BCCI always gives an impression, that the profits accruing to the body is incidental. Perhaps, I am reading too much into the matter. After all, the BCCI decides about the itinerary of the IPL, and the IPL does not decide upon the itinerary of the BCCI. Now, can the BCCI return the investments of the team owners, even if it wanted to? What soup is the BCCI in?

Aditya
on October 5, 2010, 12:11 GMT

Mr Lalit Modi should be fair to himself, and to the others in the BCCI board. Mr Modi made a mistake of judgment. Mr Modi was not the IPL Commissioner, because he was irreplaceable. He was not even the IPL commissioner because of the BCCI. He became what he became in the BCCI, because of circumstances not dictated to by him, or by any other BCCI official. If Mr Jagmohan Dalmiya could become the most important man in world sport, and if his own people, who were his pillars, wanted to replace him, or rather, the pillars of his support changed, and wanted to change him, then who is to blame? The BCCI, as a parent body of the IPL, or Indian Cricket? Perhaps, ultimately, there is nothing permanent to perception. If the BCCI was to become non essential to the running of Indian Cricket, Then the body would become irrelevant.

Rajesh
on October 1, 2010, 19:40 GMT

One thing is certain in India.......... Politics & Cricket will never get divorced, they are married for eternity !!

Rajaram
on October 1, 2010, 17:22 GMT

A masterstroke - Modi crushed out like a cigarette.

Prahlad
on October 1, 2010, 2:51 GMT

Yay for Kumble! Hope he can unearth some good spin bowlers. Someone who is even half as good as he was.

PRAVEEN
on September 30, 2010, 21:09 GMT

@EightBall ...so just because Asif/Butt ..et al were not included in IPL doesnt justify them getting into Spot Fixing. This is the dumbest argument I have heard. Life is unfair...not always the most talented get rewarded. And BCCI/IPL doesnt hold any responsibility towards PCB. Just because PCB doesnt know how to run its proceedings and is not making enough money doesnt mean that India has to do charity and help PCB.

ashish
on September 30, 2010, 16:34 GMT

a kick in the butt to mr gavaskar was long overdue. wish shastri had also asked for the exorbitant sum and would summarily have been kicked. their contribution to cricket post retirement is an enormous zero. sitting in commentary box and taking potshots at rivals and defenseless young cricketers, gesturing in the name of consultancy, siging paens of their owners and promoting jingoism and false national pride are some of their generous contributions. wish we had more cricketers who could speak english to sit in the commentary box. being ex-cricketers conversant in english seemingly is the only criterion for becoming commentator these days, otherwise their commentary is hollow like their personality. its just that they are great cricketers, they can qualify for every job in the world.

Rohith
on September 30, 2010, 15:42 GMT

@EightBall.. BCCI has never had good relations with PCB except for 2003-2008. For those five years, both countries India and Pakistan in general had friendly relations. That friendliness was seen in cricketing relations. After Mumbai-08, all the things became worse, and so did cricketing ties. The relations between BCCI & PCB were always dependent upon the political relations between the countries..

Sanket
on September 30, 2010, 14:40 GMT

The IPL was a part of the BCCI. How can there be a conflict between IPL and BCCI?
I think this is a case of unnecessary sensationalizing.

A conflict between the old guys and the new is possible.

But there were corporate honchos in BCCI before Modi came (Dalmiya, Srinivasan, and Amin are all businessman).

And statistically, the president-elect (N. Srinivasan's) team is the most successful in IPL.

Pradeep
on September 30, 2010, 14:28 GMT

Ridiculous to know that Shastri, Pataudi and Gavaskar were getting 1 crore for their role in being in the IPL council. Who is Lalit Modi to fix such fancy salaries for such jobs which entail a few hours of work every now and then!! Glad Lalit Modi has been crushed by the combined mite of the BBCI office bearers.

Eight
on September 30, 2010, 14:23 GMT

This is a good summary of the current goings-on at the BCCI from Ms. Ugra. I wish that someone like her would address the BCCI's broader responsibility to world cricket, as its de facto sole superpower. For example, I feel that the spot-fixing mess in which three high quality cricketers from Pakistan find themselves should be blamed partly on the BCCI. Why should a top class bowler such as Mohammed Asif (#2 as of today in the test rankings notwithstanding his suspension) stand by and make pittance when mediocre players rake in millions in the IPL? In the past, before the BCCI became as powerful as it now is, the other Asian boards stuck by it. Now that the BCCI has become bigger, it appears to be selling the Pakistani board and its players down the river. The BCCI needs to play a proactive role in not only rehabilitating the Pakistani players that now stand charged with corruption, but also propose concrete ways to help the PCB.

Christy
on September 30, 2010, 12:17 GMT

Dear DILLIPMOHANTY, she only said " a state Dy Chief Minister " - read the portion carefully before you comment. And more important is the fact the link to the Policitican - that is the message the Author is trying to say. Whether he was a CM or a DY CM or a Minister is beside the point !

Pradeep
on September 30, 2010, 11:42 GMT

I wonder how long it will take before people start making films and writing novels about the BCCI. Intrigue, sex, money, betrayal, revenge its all there. They could even insert the BCCI into standard stories of the Mafia.

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 10:10 GMT

"Two of the three are thought of as "protégés" of an influential BCCI politician"

This is what happens, when politicians step into the picture. Even journalists are wary typing their names. So Sharda, go ahead, take their name, if you have cricket's interest at heart! Tell us it that it is Arun Jaitley! When all other names are being mentioned in the article, why shy away from taking this guy's name?
Nobody likes to take on the politicians. Modi met his waterloo when he took on Shashi's Tharoor and his flame. And if Modi can go up in flames, anybody can. That's the malaise with the BCCI system. A Modi can be kicked out and Manohar can grin like a cheshire cat. But no BCCI head will ever have the guts to kick out a politician and still stay in BCCI to tell the tale. Why do you think the Indian intelligentsia hate the politicians so much ... and mind you all politicians are the same, the world over! The fans and media MUST keep them out of cricket!

Dillip
on September 30, 2010, 9:15 GMT

I don't think Ranjib Biswal's father was ever chief minister of Orissa, though he was a cabinet minister in the state and an influential congress party leader. Don't know from where the so called senior journalists gather their facts!

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 9:04 GMT

contd - 2: Indian cricket needs transparency, identify train and develop talent, have an adequate bench strength of national players, improve standards of performance, establish quality and accessible infrastructure, run the admnistration cleanly and profitably, deploy funds and fund flow judiciously, show intelligence in organising matches, have an efficient mafia - doping - bookie watchdog mechanism, manage the pay across levels for players so as to make it attractive as a career option to talent and more importantly connect with the fan base to increase interest and enthusiasm. The current BCCI set-up doesn't inspire that confidence! Trust me, none of the current BCCI guys would have shown leadership initiative, energy and creativity in shifting IPL-2 to SA at short notice when the politicians decided turned dense. The IPL itself was largely born out of individual entrepreneurial effort and creativity gaining stature above BCCI. Now that's the sort of people needed at the BCCI!

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 8:43 GMT

contd 1: Under law, when every entity that deals with public funds are accountable to the public directly and/or to some apex regulatory body, the BCCI dealing and handling billions of reveue and emotions, does as it pleases. Little wonder the politicians gravitate toward it. If I have to choose the lesser of the 2 evils, between the BCCI's style and Modi's style of functioning, then I would choose Modi anyday. If Modi was ad hoc in style to deliver quality results, the BCCI blatantly ignores conflicts of interest of Srinivasan. The new BCCI will completely close its ranks to the media sniffing for exposes, the only people who have had any success in exposing coverups practiced by the various cricket Boards. The solution? There has to be an independent national apex body composed by a panel of independent minded professionals to whom the BCCI is answerable. We need people who can and dare to ask the right questions and persist till they get answers ( not replies!). contd...

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 8:22 GMT

I learnt very early in life that joint responsibility leads to nil accountability. The BCCI through it's recent perestroika is once again becoming a monolith faceless entity in the functioning of its various bodies. The various bodies would be run by power mongering pot bellied ageing industrialists and politicians, making as much a mess of cricket as they did in handling the preparation of the Delhi CWGames. Transparency will hit and cover-ups the norm even if there's an expose, all handled by an equally faceless spokesman. The BCCI has NO CONNECT with opinion of the intelligentsia on Indian cricket and cricket admin. For all its noise against Modi in an attempt to portray cleanliness, the BCCI has shamelessly dropped all the cases against an ex ICC chief and even brought him on board.
CAN the BCCI explain this to the Indian public? It WONT, simply because it doeesn't hold itself accountable to it. contd...

Sunil
on September 30, 2010, 8:07 GMT

Well written Ms.Ugra.The ultimate soap opera continues,musical chairs being played in the highest echelons of the worlds richest and most powerful sports body.Whgo's to say Mr Modi,he of "the helicopter/Modicam fame" will not make a comeback five years down the line.Kumble,heading the National cricket academy..hmmm,does this mean as captain of an IPL fanchise there are two hats he will wear?Hopefully the academy wil evolve into a coaching school from the hospital it is now.

No featured comments at the moment.

Sunil
on September 30, 2010, 8:07 GMT

Well written Ms.Ugra.The ultimate soap opera continues,musical chairs being played in the highest echelons of the worlds richest and most powerful sports body.Whgo's to say Mr Modi,he of "the helicopter/Modicam fame" will not make a comeback five years down the line.Kumble,heading the National cricket academy..hmmm,does this mean as captain of an IPL fanchise there are two hats he will wear?Hopefully the academy wil evolve into a coaching school from the hospital it is now.

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 8:22 GMT

I learnt very early in life that joint responsibility leads to nil accountability. The BCCI through it's recent perestroika is once again becoming a monolith faceless entity in the functioning of its various bodies. The various bodies would be run by power mongering pot bellied ageing industrialists and politicians, making as much a mess of cricket as they did in handling the preparation of the Delhi CWGames. Transparency will hit and cover-ups the norm even if there's an expose, all handled by an equally faceless spokesman. The BCCI has NO CONNECT with opinion of the intelligentsia on Indian cricket and cricket admin. For all its noise against Modi in an attempt to portray cleanliness, the BCCI has shamelessly dropped all the cases against an ex ICC chief and even brought him on board.
CAN the BCCI explain this to the Indian public? It WONT, simply because it doeesn't hold itself accountable to it. contd...

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 8:43 GMT

contd 1: Under law, when every entity that deals with public funds are accountable to the public directly and/or to some apex regulatory body, the BCCI dealing and handling billions of reveue and emotions, does as it pleases. Little wonder the politicians gravitate toward it. If I have to choose the lesser of the 2 evils, between the BCCI's style and Modi's style of functioning, then I would choose Modi anyday. If Modi was ad hoc in style to deliver quality results, the BCCI blatantly ignores conflicts of interest of Srinivasan. The new BCCI will completely close its ranks to the media sniffing for exposes, the only people who have had any success in exposing coverups practiced by the various cricket Boards. The solution? There has to be an independent national apex body composed by a panel of independent minded professionals to whom the BCCI is answerable. We need people who can and dare to ask the right questions and persist till they get answers ( not replies!). contd...

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 9:04 GMT

contd - 2: Indian cricket needs transparency, identify train and develop talent, have an adequate bench strength of national players, improve standards of performance, establish quality and accessible infrastructure, run the admnistration cleanly and profitably, deploy funds and fund flow judiciously, show intelligence in organising matches, have an efficient mafia - doping - bookie watchdog mechanism, manage the pay across levels for players so as to make it attractive as a career option to talent and more importantly connect with the fan base to increase interest and enthusiasm. The current BCCI set-up doesn't inspire that confidence! Trust me, none of the current BCCI guys would have shown leadership initiative, energy and creativity in shifting IPL-2 to SA at short notice when the politicians decided turned dense. The IPL itself was largely born out of individual entrepreneurial effort and creativity gaining stature above BCCI. Now that's the sort of people needed at the BCCI!

Dillip
on September 30, 2010, 9:15 GMT

I don't think Ranjib Biswal's father was ever chief minister of Orissa, though he was a cabinet minister in the state and an influential congress party leader. Don't know from where the so called senior journalists gather their facts!

Kannan
on September 30, 2010, 10:10 GMT

"Two of the three are thought of as "protégés" of an influential BCCI politician"

This is what happens, when politicians step into the picture. Even journalists are wary typing their names. So Sharda, go ahead, take their name, if you have cricket's interest at heart! Tell us it that it is Arun Jaitley! When all other names are being mentioned in the article, why shy away from taking this guy's name?
Nobody likes to take on the politicians. Modi met his waterloo when he took on Shashi's Tharoor and his flame. And if Modi can go up in flames, anybody can. That's the malaise with the BCCI system. A Modi can be kicked out and Manohar can grin like a cheshire cat. But no BCCI head will ever have the guts to kick out a politician and still stay in BCCI to tell the tale. Why do you think the Indian intelligentsia hate the politicians so much ... and mind you all politicians are the same, the world over! The fans and media MUST keep them out of cricket!

Pradeep
on September 30, 2010, 11:42 GMT

I wonder how long it will take before people start making films and writing novels about the BCCI. Intrigue, sex, money, betrayal, revenge its all there. They could even insert the BCCI into standard stories of the Mafia.

Christy
on September 30, 2010, 12:17 GMT

Dear DILLIPMOHANTY, she only said " a state Dy Chief Minister " - read the portion carefully before you comment. And more important is the fact the link to the Policitican - that is the message the Author is trying to say. Whether he was a CM or a DY CM or a Minister is beside the point !

Eight
on September 30, 2010, 14:23 GMT

This is a good summary of the current goings-on at the BCCI from Ms. Ugra. I wish that someone like her would address the BCCI's broader responsibility to world cricket, as its de facto sole superpower. For example, I feel that the spot-fixing mess in which three high quality cricketers from Pakistan find themselves should be blamed partly on the BCCI. Why should a top class bowler such as Mohammed Asif (#2 as of today in the test rankings notwithstanding his suspension) stand by and make pittance when mediocre players rake in millions in the IPL? In the past, before the BCCI became as powerful as it now is, the other Asian boards stuck by it. Now that the BCCI has become bigger, it appears to be selling the Pakistani board and its players down the river. The BCCI needs to play a proactive role in not only rehabilitating the Pakistani players that now stand charged with corruption, but also propose concrete ways to help the PCB.

Pradeep
on September 30, 2010, 14:28 GMT

Ridiculous to know that Shastri, Pataudi and Gavaskar were getting 1 crore for their role in being in the IPL council. Who is Lalit Modi to fix such fancy salaries for such jobs which entail a few hours of work every now and then!! Glad Lalit Modi has been crushed by the combined mite of the BBCI office bearers.

ABOUT COOKIES

We use cookies to help make this website better, to improve our services and for advertising purposes. You can learn more about our use of cookies and change your browser settings in order to avoid cookies by clicking here. Otherwise, we'll assume you are OK to continue.